List of no-action attacks.Dynamic vs Static BonusesPhalanx tactics and buildsCrivens! A Pictsies GuideGood
Powers to intentionally miss withMr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticedWay's to fire around cornersCrits: what their really worthRetroactive bonus vs Static bonus.Runepriest handbook & discussion threadHoly Symbols to hang around your neckWays to Gain or Downgrade ActionsList of bonuses to saving throwsThe Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

If you really want an edge case that makes the wording do different things, if would be an already-prone person falling. The Lesser Ring would mean that person would land Prone, but the greater would mean that they land standing.

You don't know if I'm wrong. The rules don't really say you aren't prone while falling, but acrobatics lets you remain standing if you can remove all damage. Controlling your fall basically. In a realistic sense, most falls are uncontrolled, except only by the best of experts. Those trained in acrobatics would be a fine example. I'd say you are prone as soon as you start falling.

The rings are clearly written in that one let's you remain standing, while the other doesn't have that same wording, so the assumption would be that you land prone; falling like a feather in the end to land softly on the ground.

I made a DM ruling that the lesser ring places you prone, while the regular ring puts you on your feet.

Therein lies the problem with most of the new generation gamers, especially those playing D&D for the 1st time (4e).

To be honest, I've never seen such rules lawyering over the last 2 editions, most especially 4e (these forums as a prime example), and that has hurt the game more than anything.

For another person to call another wrong, is just plain insulting. I've been a DM for almost 30 years, and when I make a ruling, it doesn't always follow the rules as written in the book(s). Having a good group of players at the table, is paramount in helping to make this work. if you go back to the original books, the rules are NOT commandments set in stone. The problem of 4e is that they've tried to cover anything and everything. A good DM, an old school DM, uses the rules as a guideline.

In fact, I think the 4e DMs guide actually has this printed in the early pages, but it is mostly ignored by the 4e DMs & players.

So, in retrospect, when playing D&D and making a ruling, do what you feel is best. It is most certainly NOT WRONG.

Therein lies the problem with most of the new generation gamers, especially those playing D&D for the 1st time (4e).

To be honest, I've never seen such rules lawyering over the last 2 editions, most especially 4e (these forums as a prime example), and that has hurt the game more than anything.

For another person to call another wrong, is just plain insulting. I've been a DM for almost 30 years, and when I make a ruling, it doesn't always follow the rules as written in the book(s). Having a good group of players at the table, is paramount in helping to make this work. if you go back to the original books, the rules are NOT commandments set in stone. The problem of 4e is that they've tried to cover anything and everything. A good DM, an old school DM, uses the rules as a guideline.

In fact, I think the 4e DMs guide actually has this printed in the early pages, but it is mostly ignored by the 4e DMs & players.

So, in retrospect, when playing D&D and making a ruling, do what you feel is best. It is most certainly NOT WRONG.

Yeah, no. Significant disagreement. DMs can, in fact, be wrong. Nobody is right all the time, it's part of being human. And I've been DMing as long as you have, so don't throw that 'new generation' crap around.

You're more than welcome to ignore rules as you see fit. It could well make the game more fun, particularly if the rules get in the way of your rile playing...

But you're in the *Rules Q&A forum*. Here, when people ask what the rules are, we tell them what the rules are. You were incorrect about the rules as written. I told you that, because not everyone DMs the way you do. it's fine, niggly detail, and it's sometimes poorly-written and obscure, but many people play by RAW.

IOW, when someone provides the right answer to someone else's question, in the forum for providing answers to peoples' questions about the rules, please actually check the answer and provide it, not start edition warring. If you're not going to actually answer rules questions, please don't answer at all.